Comparison of magnetic-susceptibility meters using rock samples from the Wopmay Orogen, Northwest Territories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The magnetic susceptibility of 51 rock specimens from the Wopmay Orogen, Northwest Territories, was measured using three different hand-held meters to quantify instrument variations. This is a simple but important study for rock-property databases containing measurements taken by different geoscientists. The three instruments (KT-10, MS2E, and SM-30) differ in a) inductive-electromagnetic-signal frequency, b) source-coil size and geometry, and c) applied field strength. Repeat measurements at different locations on a sample provided a measure of signal noise and within-sample susceptibility variations. The MS2E exhibited the largest within-sample-signal standard deviation due to its smaller coil. We then compared instrument response by computing the best-fit least-squares line. The SM-30 and KT-10 produced similar responses, while the MS2E was systematically higher. For use in magnetic modelling, there is no effective difference between the KT-10 and SM-30 susceptibility measurements. More individual measurements are required when using the MS2E.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".